Dominique B. v. Social Security Administration

Background

Dominique B., D.L.F., Jr., and Dontay C. sued the Social Security Administration, or other filing departments, alleging unlawful disruptions to their public assistance. Although three plaintiffs were named, only Dominique B. signed the complaint. Dominique B. also filed an application to proceed without prepaying filing fees.

Because Dominique B. sought that fee waiver, the complaint was subject to review before it was served on the defendant under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). The opinion states that the plaintiffs were representing themselves without lawyers.

Reasons for the Recommendation

The magistrate judge identified several defects.

First, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 requires each person named as a plaintiff to sign a pleading. Only Dominique B. signed the complaint. The opinion also states that Dominique B. is not an attorney and therefore cannot prosecute claims in federal court for anyone other than herself. Although a parent may represent a minor child in a case involving the denial of Social Security benefits, the complaint did not show that D.L.F., Jr.—identified as a minor—was Dominique B.’s child. It was also unclear whether Dominique B. was challenging the denial of benefits to D.L.F., Jr. or Dontay C.

Second, the complaint did not state a legally sufficient claim. Although it appeared to invoke 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the complaint did not identify the final decision under review or state what type of benefits were claimed. It also did not identify any other federal statute or legal rule that supplied a basis for the lawsuit. The court explained that, even though complaints filed without a lawyer are read generously, they must still provide enough facts and legal grounds to support a plausible claim.

Recommendation and Notice

Judge Dulce J. Foster recommended that the matter be dismissed without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), and that Dominique B.’s application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs be denied as moot.

The recommendation also warned that continued filing of unsupported or abusive actions could result in restrictions on the plaintiffs’ ability to start new cases in the District of Minnesota, including a requirement that they be represented by a lawyer or obtain advance permission from a judicial officer.

The document is a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation, not a final order or judgment of the District Court. The notice states that the parties could file specific written objections within 14 days after being served, and that the recommendation was not directly appealable to the Eighth Circuit.